Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Ravinder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners are seeking following reliefs:
"a.) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ/order/direction of the similar nature whereby directing the Respondents to grant the benefits of ACPs/MACPs Scheme to the Petitioners with effect from the elate of reporting for Basic Recruit Training;
b.) Issues writ of mandamus or any other writ/order/direction of the similar nature whereby directing the Respondents to upgrade the pay scale as per the benefits of ACPs/MACPs Scheme to the Petitioners with effect from the date of reporting for Basic Recruit Training;
c.) Issue directions of a similar nature as issued by this Hon'ble Court, whereby this Hon'ble Court granted the benefits of the original ACPs/MACPs Scheme to the similarly situated persons as was extended by the respondents in view of the orders made by this Hon'ble Court from time to time."
2. Being aggrieved by the Order dated 08.12.2022, the petitioners made the Representation dated 15.12.2022.
3. In response to the said representation, the respondents vide Communicated dated 02.01.2023 informed that the matter is already pending consideration.
4. Accordingly, we hereby dispo
The court's decision highlighted the principle of timely decision-making by the respondent authority in matters related to the MACP scheme.
The court's decision highlighted the principle of mandamus, emphasizing the need for timely decisions on representations made by petitioners.
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the ACP Scheme and the reliance on a previous Supreme Court decision.
The court emphasized the importance of timely consideration of representations and the option for petitioners to challenge decisions if still aggrieved.
Employees are entitled to timely resolution of representations regarding service benefits, and failure to respond allows for judicial intervention to ensure compliance.
The court's decision highlighted the principle of mandamus and the requirement for reasoned orders within a specified timeframe.
The court clarified that departmental examination requirements do not apply to ACP benefits under the applicable rules.
The main legal point established is the court's power to issue a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to treat the petition as a representation and decide within a specified timeframe.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
